2013 DeRosa.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons‐Attribution‐Noncommercial‐Share Alike License 2.5 Canada (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by‐nc‐sa/2.5/ca/),
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly attributed, not used for commercial
purposes, and, if transformed, the resulting work is redistributed under the
same or similar license to this one.

Abstract

Objective –To study
the information-seeking practices of hospital staff and weigh the impact of
hospital libraries on effective information-seeking.

Methods – Participants were given a questionnaire comprised of
five parts: general information (including gender, age, education, position,
and professional experience); questions on computer and Internet accessibility;
questions regarding individual information needs; questions on
information-seeking obstacles; and a question regarding the satisfaction with
the current degree of information availability in the hospital. The last
question was ranked using a 5-point Likert scale. Each questionnaire was
distributed with a cover letter explaining the anonymity and consent of the
respondent. Hospital members were randomly selected using a number generator
and respondents returned completed surveys to the hospital personnel office in
a sealed envelope within a specified time frame. The sampled group was
representative of the overall population of the hospital.

Main Results – The authors discuss demographic data of
respondents: 65.7% were women; 56.7% were over 40 years old; 29.0% were
graduates of higher technological institutes; 28.3% were university graduates;
9.7% held a postgraduate degree; 8.3% had a PhD; and 1.4% had only secondary
education. As for the remainder of the survey questions: 64% of respondents had
access to the Internet both at home and at work, while only 8.2% had no access
to the Internet at all; most respondents noted using the Internet for seeking
scientific information (83.0%) and e-mail communication (65.3%); the main
obstacle respondents noted experiencing when seeking information was the lack
of time (3.7 score on Likert scale). A lack of information services was second
to the time issue with a Likert scale score of 3.6.

Conclusion – Based on the research results, the authors affirmed
the invaluable role of hospital libraries. The hospital library can help to
eliminate the obstacles faced by healthcare professionals by providing support
in the areas of weakness based on the survey results. This can be made possible
through the hospital library’s involvement in educational activities,
investigation of information technologies, and development of information
services to accommodate the difficulties regularly experienced by hospital
staff. Researchers revealed that funding for hospital libraries in Greece is an
issue preventing many new initiatives, that there is no association to
represent hospital libraries in Greece, that the few libraries operating in
hospitals in Greece are understaffed with no administrative control, and the
majority of Greek hospitals do not have adequate library facilities. These
drawbacks contribute to the information-seeking challenges experienced by Greek
healthcare professionals.

Commentary

This study was
conducted as a means to evaluate the importance and shortcomings of the
hospital library in relation to its user base. It is important to note that the
researchers did not provide details about how they developed their categories
for their survey, that no standard framework was used to create and analyze the
questionnaire, and that the method of distribution of the questionnaire is
unclear.

Aside from the
ill-transparent survey categories, questions, and framework used, the study at
METAXA in Greece clearly defined the target population and percentages of
respondents. Also, by supplying participants with a cover letter stating
confidentiality and instructions on returning the survey (in a closed envelope)
to non-study researchers, the researchers ensured that both the results and
participant identities were blinded to them, though the questionnaire is not
completely anonymous as submissions were coded upon receipt. The authors also
chose a population representative of the hospital’s total community (20% of
total population of medical, nursing, and administrative/technical staff).
Partnering with the personnel department on this effort was an effective way of
achieving an unbiased questionnaire distribution.

The authors did not
include a version of the final survey with their paper, meaning readers do not
have the opportunity to ensure that the questions asked were clearly stated and
able to elicit exact answers from respondents. It would be helpful to see the
survey itself while reading the results of the study. The use of the Likert
scale is evident and this study could be replicated by other institutions if
desired (with the exception of the official questionnaire used).

The conclusions
reflect the analysis of the study in that the authors comment on the
information seeking challenges faced by professionals and give suggestions for
librarians to eliminate these obstacles. Though these are briefly mentioned by
the authors, there is no further detail about implementing certain programs
into the hospital library workflow. Furthermore, some examination into ways of
delivering information services with little administrative support would be
helpful.

This research shows
the gaps in education and opportunities for training on efficient information
seeking in the hospital. New technology allows for remote training as well as
more dynamic in-person instruction. Hospital librarians should know the tools
their clients prefer using and show them how to enhance their experience and
get the most out of research. The lack of time reported by many hospital
professionals is a sign that the library can offer information services such as
performing literature searches and delivering results to clients as requested,
for instance. Also, evaluating and suggesting key resources that are the most
intuitive for hospital professionals is a way of showcasing the librarian’s
special skills and helping the client maximize their time when conducting
research.

The appraisal of this
information-seeking behaviour study was conducted using the Evidence-Based
Library and Information Practice (EBLIP) Critical Appraisal Checklist from
Memorial University of Newfoundland (Glynn, 2006).